SBORTE SHYDEQUIOUS T. CLAY v. V.T. MCRAE, JUDGE

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 17, 2025
DocketA26E0058
StatusPublished

This text of SBORTE SHYDEQUIOUS T. CLAY v. V.T. MCRAE, JUDGE (SBORTE SHYDEQUIOUS T. CLAY v. V.T. MCRAE, JUDGE) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
SBORTE SHYDEQUIOUS T. CLAY v. V.T. MCRAE, JUDGE, (Ga. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________ September 17, 2025

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A26E0058. SBORTE SHYDEQUIOUS T. CLAY v. V.T. MCRAE, JUDGE et al.

Upon consideration of the APPELLANT’S RULE 40(C) PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS in the above styled case, it is ordered that the motion is hereby DENIED.1

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________ 09/17/2025 I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

1 The petitioner is cautioned against filing future motions or pleadings in this Court that have no substantial basis in law. Court of Appeals Rule 7 (e) (2) permits this Court to levy penalties for frivolous appeals, applications, or motions against a party or his counsel (including pro se litigants pursuant to Rule 2 (d)) with a penalty of up to $10,000, and the penalty shall constitute a money judgment. Further, the Court will not tolerate discourteous or disparaging remarks regarding opposing counsel, any judge, or any court personnel. Such remarks are strictly forbidden pursuant to Rule 10. Applications, motions, and briefs containing such opprobrious language may be rejected. Finally, we feel that it is our duty to warn the petitioner that repeated frivolous or abusive litigation may result in his access to the courts being restricted. See Smith v. Adamson, 226 Ga. App. 698 (487 SE2d 386) (1997).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Smith v. Adamson
487 S.E.2d 386 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
SBORTE SHYDEQUIOUS T. CLAY v. V.T. MCRAE, JUDGE, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sborte-shydequious-t-clay-v-vt-mcrae-judge-gactapp-2025.